By employing a search theory, we had analyzed influence on matching between demander and supplier of logs by the changes in the trend of housing starts.
 Reflecting the number of housing starts to be increased in 1950's, resources of many forest in Japan had been decreased rapidly by unreasonable disafforestation. The strong demand of logs could not be met enough, even if between demander and supplier of logs spent time for trying to match together. Import of logs were opened by the Japanese government, because of the strong demand not to be met by domestic short supply. Against import of logs to be opened completely, we presume the relationship between forestry and industry of housing would keep as before. Later the number of housing starts were decreased, especially by the depression from 1990 and the graying of recent society in Japan. According to the number of housing starts decreased, the lumber demander left from the market of logs in Japan. Thus most of the relationships between demander and supplier of logs had been cut for the lumber demander leaving from the market of logs. Thereby, even if large capacity to gather lumber was necessary, the capacity of lumber supplier would be significantly dropping because of not using the capacity for a long time. The lumber demander prefers to trade with a foreign country for a large selection of lumber and logs being available. On the other hand, domestic forestry as the log supplier has declined.
 For the world economic booms from mid-2000, the demand of lumber and logs became stronger than before. Though the domestic demand of lumber increased in Japan by higher price of import goods, Japanese supplier could not gather domestic lumber. Japanese government carried out some policies towards that situation. By these policies, Japanese supplier could gather domestic logs. But a self‐sufficiency rate of logs in Japan did not improve even though demander of wood being able to make matching to some part of supplier of logs. It is because most of demander of logs didn't keep selecting Japanese lumber and logs for being unable to secure both the quantity of the domestic lumber required in the long term and the quality in these policies.
 Thus the existence of the intermediary who grasps the situation on the demand side and the supply side of the logs together, and can perform matching well is necessary. We think it is necessary that Japanese government promotes human resource development of the intermediary who grasps the situation on the demand side and the supply side of the logs together, and can perform matching well.

抄録全体を表示

Currently Japanese humanities scholars are under pressure to use English in teaching and writing irrespective of whether they have sufficient proficiency in it even in cases where there is no absolute necessity to use that language. Given this awkward situation, I would like to address such questions as 1) what are the roles of English and Japanese in the process of “internationalization”? and 2) how will it be possible to create a common platform on which literary scholars specializing in different languages can share their knowledge and experience. Finally, I would like to reconsider the ultimate question: why is it necessary to “internationalize” literary studies and what does it really mean to “internationalize”? In my view, Japanese foreign literature scholars have valid reasons for their use of Japanese when conducting their academic activities; after all, the very process of studying and understanding foreign culture while basing oneself on Japanese language and culture can be a challenging, yet highly positive cross-cultural experience which can bring about fruitful findings and new contributions. English should be actively used as a tool for communication in the international academic community of which Japanese literary scholars should be an integral part.

抄録全体を表示

本論文は，「解雇規制」を中心とする「日本の雇用の制度，政策の内容と決定システム」を研究対象とする．解雇規制に係る制度・政策論議の中心に位置しその内容を象徴する「解雇権濫用の法理」という表現を見て，その実質的内容について概要だけでもイメージできる読者は極めて稀だろう．関連制度との関係や関連論点に関わる「専門家」の意見の相違・対立や分布等に関する知見を含めた実質的理解についてはその程度はさらに極端になる．関連制度や政策論議の主要舞台およびその決定システムが「労働政策審議会」を象徴的中心とする固定的かつ閉鎖的なものとなってから久しく，一部の「関係者」間での議論と「調整」に圧倒的な比重が置かれてきたことが大きな理由のように見える．ほとんどの日本国民にとって，解雇規制を象徴的中心とする雇用制度・政策に関わるissuesは，身近で重要であるが，ほとんど何も知られておらず，実質的な関心を抱くことは甚だしく稀であった．

論文前半の「（理論的な）検討の内容と現実の『解雇規制』（さらに，雇用関連規制の全体）の対応関係はいかなるものか？」が多くの読者の関心に的確に対応する設問だろう．しかし，この設問が適切であるためには，現実の制度・政策の実態が明瞭・明確に把握できている（できる）ことが必要・必須である．以下に見る如く，「解雇規制とか『解雇権濫用の法理』という表現は頻繁に見聞きするが，その具体的内容はどうなっているのかと関連解説などを見ても，よくわからない．裁判官や労働法学者を含む法律実務家の間に共通の認識は存在するのか･･････」とする筆者が長年にわたって悩まされてきた困惑を多くの読者が共有することになるだろう．

［Ⅴ］は，「なぜこのような状況に陥り，長年にわたって不問に付されてきたとでも評すべきプロセスが継続してきたのか」と問い始めた読者のための部分であり，本論文の核心にあたる．

状況を的確に理解し，オープンな議論を広範な参加者とともに開始・展開する必要がある．その前提として，関連制度・政策決定過程の実態・現状を的確に理解し，見直しや再設計・再構築を大胆に進めるように政府（現状をここまで放置し続けた厚労省ではない）に求めることが重要である．５年ほど前から基本政策の一つとして政府が進めてきたEBPM（evidence-based policy making）推進政策の目玉・象徴となる重大案件として「解雇規制」を取り上げればよい．

「解雇規制」は「雇用」に関わる「政策」の象徴的中核である．「雇用」に関わる「政策」は，経済活動・国民生活の全分野に影響が及ぶ経済政策の核心であり，その当否が経済全体の活力・成長に重大な影響を及ぼす．雇用規制の導入・強化は，労働市場の流動性とダイナミズムの低下を通じて資源配分の効率性を悪化させ，経済全体の生産性の上昇を阻害するおそれが強い．「解雇規制」に象徴される雇用政策に関わる議論を決定的に支配する「格差」「対等」「安定」「保障」「公平」「平等」等の表現へのはなはだしい偏愛傾向が，長期間にわたる日本経済の「停滞」（的雰囲気）の主要な原因の一つかもしれないと考えて正面から向き合う必要がある．

抄録全体を表示